The speaker, identified only as "Mr. Chairman," discusses the role of the Foreign Influence Task Force in interacting with social media companies. He acknowledges the continuous exchange of information with Mr. Johnson from Louisiana and Ms. Hagerman, noting the differences in their characterizations.
The speaker mentions the federal court's recent denial of a stay of its order, stating that the court essentially told them to follow the law as articulated by the United States Supreme Court in the area of the First Amendment. He emphasizes that the Foreign Influence Task Force is not a predecessor's decision.
The speaker discusses the continuous interaction with social media companies and the testimony of Elvis Chan, an FBI agent. He acknowledges that the FBI has flagged thousands of posts to social media companies, which have continued to meet on a periodic basis.
The speaker expresses concern about the potential coercion in nature if there is a constant expectant suggestion from the FBI to social media companies regarding social media posts. He believes that the courts preliminarily found this to be the case.
The speaker also mentions that the FBI has been passing through information from the Ukrainian SBU to social media, characterizing it as normal for the FBI to serve effectively as the agent of a foreign power. He mentions past abuses by the FBI, such as cointel Pro, and questions why the FBI would walk that final line with respect to Americans' fundamental constitutional rights at scale.
The speaker mentions the case of Lamont versus Postmaster General, where the Supreme Court stated that Americans have a First Amendment right of access to information, even if it is propaganda originating abroad. He questions how this would comport with the FBI's actions.
The speaker discusses the FBI's engagement with social media companies to warn them of hack and leak operations. He mentions that the FBI had the Hunter Biden laptop for more than nine months before the 2020 election.
The speaker concludes by expressing concern about the potential infringement on Americans' First Amendment rights and suggesting potential solutions such as taking an appropriation from the task force or putting their Intel Powers in another agency.
1. The speaker appreciates a reminder and follows up on the foreign influence task force.
2. The task force has exchanged information with Mr. Johnson from Louisiana and Ms. Hagerman from Louisiana.
3. The speaker respects differences in characterization.
4. The speaker is aware of the continuous interaction with social media companies.
5. The speaker is aware of the testimony of Elvis Chan, an agent.
6. The speaker has read parts of Elvis Chan's testimony.
7. Thousands of posts were flagged to social media companies by the FBI.
8. The speaker believes that constant expectant suggestions from the FBI to social media companies can become coercive.
9. The speaker acknowledges that information from the Ukrainian SBU was passed through to social media.
10. The speaker questions why the FBI would walk a final line with respect to Americans' fundamental constitutional rights at scale.
11. The speaker mentions knowledge of past abuses by the FBI, such as cointel Pro.
12. The speaker refers to a case, Lamont versus Postmaster General, where the Supreme Court stated that Americans have a First Amendment right of access to information, even if it is propaganda originating abroad.
13. The speaker mentions that the FBI engaged with social media companies continuously, warning them of hack and leak operations.
14. The speaker acknowledges the past incident of cointel Pro, a mother of all hack and leak operations.
15. The speaker mentions the New York Times company versus United States Pentagon papers case, which states that stolen or inappropriately taken information cannot be restrained by a prior state in almost any circumstance to prevent distribution.
16. The speaker questions how the foreign influence task force is warning of hack and leak operations to innocent news organizations or social media organizations where information may be circulated.
17. The speaker states that there is no serious dispute that foreign adversaries have and continue to attempt to interfere in elections and use social media to do it.
18. The speaker mentions that President Trump declared a National Emergency in 2018 to that effect and the Senate intelligence Committee found the same thing and called for more information sharing between the U.S. and social media companies.
19. The speaker emphasizes that trampling on the established First Amendment rights of Americans is not justified.